Election Year!!!

[Moe_Syzlak]

I think there are a myriad number of reasons why she was chosen. She has certainly excited the Republican base, which I'm sure was one of them.

But that base is the evangelical right, no? The fiscal conservatives I know are none-too-happy with the selection. Some of your earlier posts lead me to believe you don't like that the GOP has been hijacked by the evangelical right (correct me if I'm wrong). I, myself, describe myself as a Lincoln republican, but see nothing resembling that in today's GOP. I was hopeful that the nomination of McCain might be a step back in the right direction, but this clearly shows me that is not the case.

[John Smith]

that is exactly my point. you continue to help them make them legitimate issues by...well...making them legitimate issues! the only people talking about these issues as much, if not more than, the 'religious right'? the overly offended not-so-religious left. frankly, i don't give a shit about the absolutes either side demands in the face of losing my job, not being able to sell my house, entering thunderdome to be able to gas up my car, not being able to afford sending twin boys to college at the same time, worrying about another cold war, etc.

 

believe in god or don't believe in god and manage your life accordingly in a way that isn't intrusive and/or demaning to others. outside of that...i. don't. care. at all.

 

And my point is that thhe democrats can no longer sit idly by and let the onion be peeled away uncontested. I think we see the strategy the same way but have different ideas on how to deal with it.

[fatheadfred]

Hothead! There is so much recorded evidence that shows McCain losing it and telling the media and elected officials to go fuck a duck. This sort of a temper is really hard to contain when push comes to shove. Obama proved he can stay level headed no matter what is thrown @ him. He's a smooth talker under pressure, McCain is not.

 

Fuck a duck is one of the funniest statements ever...but in all scientific honesty it is very difficult for ducks to have intercourse. So does this mean, "Go fuck something that is impossible to fuck?" Maybe, cuz that would be nerve wracking and blue balling, that is, if the duck turned you on. I bet Levi has tried.

[Party @ the Moontower]

Yeah, he's

without a teleprompter.

 

 

I think the ghost of Bush entered his body for a few minutes is all . He's not a hothead though. He's a very calm and articulate speaker unlike McCain. I could go head to head on vids with you on that one, but I don't have all day. Debates should be fun.

[kwall]

Nice answer. The tap dance comment was not implying that you were lying at all, if you read it that way then that's how you read it. Sorry if you take it that way. It was meant to imply that you tied together your disparate answers so neatly in a simple reply. I'd rather not f*&k myself though.

sorry, i don't believe your 3-word reply of "nice tap dance" was supposed to be some kind of complement.

[EL the Famous]

And my point is that thhe democrats can no longer sit idly by and let the onion be peeled away uncontested. I think we see the strategy the same way but have different ideas on how to deal with it.

 

seems to be the case. i'm not really sure i've seen the dems sitting idle on it and actually going at it w/ the other side at the expense of pounding them on botched economics/foreign policy seems to have worked really well in the past couple of elections.

[Party @ the Moontower]

Fuck a duck is one of the funniest statements ever...but in all scientific honesty it is very difficult for ducks to have intercourse. So does this mean, "Go fuck something that is impossible to fuck?" Maybe, cuz that would be nerve wracking and blue balling, that is, if the duck turned you on. I bet Levi has tried.

 

 

Go fuck a duck Pedro

[John Smith]

You keep saying this, but I'm not sure why you are so confident that it is true.

 

I've seen three of the four speak and I'll stand by my opinion. Mcains answers will all be POW POW POW, 911, 911, 911, experience experience experience he will not focus on issues, he will speak in soundbites and stump speech phrases. Obama is far more intelligent and far more eloquent when he speaks. Though that may be held against him as a lot of people in our country resent education and knowledge. Biden vs. Palin? Not even worth discussing.

[fatheadfred]

Yeah, he's

without a teleprompter.

 

Do we need to create a gaffe inventory? I would bet my lunch money that McCain has many, many more, even with a teleprompter.

 

Go fuck a duck Pedro

 

I am trying but they are all abstaining due to their Republican values training.

[John Smith]

seems to be the case. i'm not really sure i've seen the dems sitting idle on it and actually going at it w/ the other side at the expense of pounding them on botched economics/foreign policy seems to have worked really well in the past couple of elections.

 

For me it's an all of the above strategy. Presidential elections bring out more single iissue voters than congressional elections. If it was strictly about issues 2004 would have turned out differently.

[Party @ the Moontower]

i don't know what the answer is. i'm not a fricking advisor to the campaign. i'm just theorizing on what their reasoning might be.

 

 

So why bring the kid's baby's daddy? What does this show..family unity? I wish they could be left alone and not used as some weird pawns. They will probably get 2 million dollars for the baby's pics in People magizine though.

[uncool2pillow]

I think there are a myriad number of reasons why she was chosen. She has certainly excited the Republican base, which I'm sure was one of them.

That's what I cannot understand. I, like Moe, am a longtime Republican who stands agaist much of the Chrisitian Coalition's wing of the party. There are literally dozens of Christian Coalition Republicans who are much more qualified to be president. Why do they get excited about Palin? The cause is so important to them that they overlook qualifications. I'd still be planning on voting for McCain, for example, if he'd named Huckabee, Romney, Brownback, Thompson, etc., etc., etc. I cannot cast a vote that will put Palin 1 heartbeat away...

 

Grrr....

[Good Old Neon]

ignore? not if they are really that important to you, i guess. lambast ad naseum? probably not a good idea if you aren't okay w/ the mccain/palin ticket takign the white house. you cannot convince folks that agree with them on these issues that they are wrong. don't you get that? however, there are much better, more tangible legs to stand on relative to the economy and foreign policy.

 

i'm not going to go post by post here, but i'm going to guestimate the larger % of topics covered have been totally related to these 'faith-based' issues. especially you, hitchens. again, free country...but you are doing nothing but keeping it in front of stuff that isn't so 'immovable'.

 

With all due respect, I don

[Party @ the Moontower]

The RNC is bringing up the man McCain used to be to make the McCain of today look better. While in Congress he wasn't a huge flip-flopper like today, pretty consistent on most issues. But as soon as he decided he wanted to be prez, he tossed most of his positions in the republican trash can in order to get elected. The "straight talking Maverick" says what ever you want to hear now. So what McCain are they talking about??????

 

 

 

Here's a list of 75 flip-flops by McCain since running for election from the The Official McCain Flip-Flop List-http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/flipflops

 

I realize all politicians flip-flop. But for real, this is ridiculous.

 

Good one Tammy. So you are saying the RNC is basically talking about the old McCain, not the McCain of 2008.Not the one that voted almost 100% with Bush this year. The RNC that doesn't even want Bush to exist this week? POW POW POW...man, they should encourage this to happen to would be presidents of the future. Maybe fake a POW camp in a fake war to help move the future white presidents along.

[Party @ the Moontower]

That's what I cannot understand. I, like Moe, am a longtime Republican who stands agaist much of the Chrisitian Coalition's wing of the party. There are literally dozens of Christian Coalition Republicans who are much more qualified to be president. Why do they get excited about Palin? The cause is so important to them that they overlook qualifications. I'd still be planning on voting for McCain, for example, if he'd named Huckabee, Romney, Brownback, Thompson, etc., etc., etc. I cannot cast a vote that will put Palin 1 heartbeat away...

 

Grrr....

 

You have just given me faith (non-religious kind) in America and in republicans. Some I fear, are just to hard-headed on this one.

[Duck-Billed Catechist]

Despite popular opinion on this board, not all conservatives or Republicans believe in a black-and-white solution to this issue. Besides, it shouldn't even come into play in a federal election.

 

 

 

I disagree with you on the reasons she was chosen, but if that perception keeps being played up and that Palin was chosen to get "Hillary voters" (which couldn't be further from the truth), then perhaps the perception will become stronger and more widely believed than the real reasons.

While that's clearly not the only reason she was selected, can you say that that reason couldn't be "further than the truth" with a straight face? Have you seen her speak at all since being selected? Like here at her first apperance with McCain? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q5J98Rnft9s or here, that same weekend?

[Party @ the Moontower]

Nothing you or I or anyone has to say is going to convince JUDE to vote Obama or Party at the Moon Tower to vote McCain.

 

 

I like $$$.

[EL the Famous]

No offense, but when I go looking to have my mind changed, I go to the library and pick up a book, I don

[Party @ the Moontower]

but when I go looking to have my mind changed, I go to the library and pick up a book, I don't consult internet message boards.

 

 

If Palin had her way though, some of them books would be missing.

 

Am I the only one that finds Palin wishing to ban books f'n crazy?

[bleedorange]

But that base is the evangelical right, no? The fiscal conservatives I know are none-too-happy with the selection. Some of your earlier posts lead me to believe you don't like that the GOP has been hijacked by the evangelical right (correct me if I'm wrong). I, myself, describe myself as a Lincoln republican, but see nothing resembling that in today's GOP. I was hopeful that the nomination of McCain might be a step back in the right direction, but this clearly shows me that is not the case.

 

A large part of the base consists of that, sure, which is one reason she was chosen. From a political perspective, a candidate needs that portion of the electorate energized about voting.

 

I also think she was chosen to appeal to the women voters in the swing states in the Rust Belt and West.

 

I also think she definitely shares in McCain's views on fiscal responsibility. But I would agree that the one worrisome economic issue is her tax on the oil companies in Alaska. It has brought in money to the state, but has stymied future development and production.

 

I think her views on energy policies square with McCain, too.

 

So to answer your overall question, like any VP pick it was partly political and partly ideological. She doesn't represent the perfect choice in my mind, but she shares enough of my views to where I'm excited about the possibilities the ticket represents.

[Good Old Neon]

because that's the ONLY place this debate/outcry on these issues i taking place. you are absolutely right.

 

No, of course not, but I was responding to your post, in which you were referring to what I have or have had to say on THIS message board.

[kwall]

[Moe_Syzlak]

A large part of the base consists of that, sure, which is one reason she was chosen. From a political perspective, a candidate needs that portion of the electorate energized about voting.

 

I also think she was chosen to appeal to the women voters in the swing states in the Rust Belt and West.

 

I also think she definitely shares in McCain's views on fiscal responsibility. But I would agree that the one worrisome economic issue is her tax on the oil companies in Alaska. It has brought in money to the state, but has stymied future development and production.

 

I think her views on energy policies square with McCain, too.

 

So to answer your overall question, like any VP pick it was partly political and partly ideological. She doesn't represent the perfect choice in my mind, but she shares enough of my views to where I'm excited about the possibilities the ticket represents.

Fair enough. I do think McCain's need for the evangelicals at this point was the reason Palin was picked over other candidates that have the other qualities you mention. If pandering to the evangelicals was not the top reason, I see a number of other candidates that better align ideologically and represent a decision based on governing rather than election politics, but we can agree to disagree. There's plenty I'm not thrilled about with Obama, but McCain has just totally lost the (great deal of) respect I had for him.

[fatheadfred]

I also think she was chosen to appeal to the women voters in the swing states in the Rust Belt.

 

I also think she definitely shares in McCain's views on fiscal responsibility. But I would agree that the one worrisome economic issue is her tax on the oil companies in Alaska. It has brought in money to the state, but has stymied future development and production.

 

I think her views on energy policies square with McCain, too.

 

Rust belt does not benefit from a McCain election.

 

I thought Republicans didn't tax. I thought only the librals taxed, taxed, taxed.

 

McCain's energy policy is friggin sucky. Oil expansion.

[bleedorange]

While that's clearly not the only reason she was selected, can you say that that reason couldn't be "further than the truth" with a straight face? Have you seen her speak at all since being selected? Like here at her first apperance with McCain? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q5J98Rnft9s or here, that same weekend?

 

Yes to all four of your questions. Do you think it would be wise to ignore the first woman to run a nearly successful campaign for president when describing the achievements of women in politics? Or while making a case to "shatter the glass ceiling," would it be better to disgrace her name?

 

It has always sounded to me that she is appropriately giving credit where credit is due. Hillary's candidacy was historic and is rightly being acknowledged.

 

That being said, none of that sounds like an effort to obtain votes from Hillary supporters. It's unrealistic. There are more female votes out there to be won. They helped Bush win in 2004 and they represent a large portion of the voting public that McCain needs.